On Oct 28, 2016 6:26 PM, "Gregg Reynolds" <dev at mobileink.com> wrote: > > On Oct 28, 2016 6:05 PM, "Nivedita Singhvi" <niveditasinghvi at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 10/28/2016 03:56 PM, Gregg Reynolds wrote: > >> > >> On Oct 28, 2016 5:35 PM, "Mats Wichmann" <mats at osg.samsung.com > >> <mailto:mats at osg.samsung.com>> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On 10/28/2016 04:33 PM, Gregg Reynolds wrote: > >>> > On Oct 28, 2016 5:25 PM, "Nivedita Singhvi" > >> > >> <niveditasinghvi at gmail.com <mailto:niveditasinghvi at gmail.com> > >> <mailto:niveditasinghvi at gmail.com <mailto:niveditasinghvi at > >> gmail.com>>> > >> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>> >> > >>> >> Hello, > >>> >> > >>> >> While the wiki page lists the names of the architects, maintainers > >>> >> and other contacts, it does not provide an email (except for a few) > >>> >> or other contact info: > >>> >> > >>> >> https://wiki.iotivity.org/projects_and_functionsrmation. > >>> >> > >>> >> While it's possible to hunt down some folks on the mailing list or via > >>> >> the git tree (not always reachable, or accessible to all), it would be > >>> >> nice to have the preferred email contact available off that wiki page, > >>> >> or elsewhere, following the model that the Linux Kernel Maintainers > >>> >> file takes. > >>> >> > >>> >> https://www.kernel.org/doc/linux/MAINTAINERS > >>> >> > >>> >> > >>> >> Would the iotivity community please consider this? > >>> >> > >>> > > >>> > +1 > >>> > >>> I know not everyone is always here all the time, but is there a > >> > >> problem with mailing to this list? > >>> > >>> > >> not sure I understand the question. personally I prefer that everything > >> be discussed on this list, but as a matter of fact that is not what > >> happens with gerrit. tons of stuff gets discussed only by the people > >> included as gerrit reviewers, and the results end up presented to the > >> rest of us as facts on the ground. > >> > >> somewhere on the web there is a great article explaining why email is > >> the best way to deal with patches (esp. wrt to linux) but naturally I > >> cannot find it. > >> > >> I think this is a (relatively) major problem with a gerrit-based project. > >> > >> one obvious way to begin to address this is to send daily digests. > >> > >> -gregg > >> > > > > https://lwn.net/Articles/702177/ > > > > Is that the one you're referring to? > > > close enough. not sure it's the article I remember but it make the same points. thanks! I spent a good 10 minutes googling linux, kernel, email, and got nothing but stuff about the best email clients. :) > > anyway the point I would like to make is this: iotivity is supposed to be open source. which it is, as far as licensing is concerned. but an open source project should really have an open process, which imho iotivity does not have.
clarification: there's closed process, which I don't think applies here, and there's open but opaque process. or sth like that. I do not mean to impugn the motives of anybody, just talking about practical realities from an outsider perspective. g I'm very grateful that the Big Companies contributing to it make their code available but I confess I'm a little miffed that so much of what they do happens behind the scenes. take 1.2 as an example. massive changes, none of which (or at least few of which) have been openly discussed on this list. e.g. going to mbeddtls. I have not had the time to monitor 1.2, and since most of it has not been openly discussed on the list I have no idea what I'm in for. not so good, imo. > > -gregg -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.iotivity.org/pipermail/iotivity-dev/attachments/20161028/54e5edf2/attachment.html>
